Macadesigner: Seriously? under CONs"High-res sensor requires dedicated approach to shooting""Tools for shooting with third party lenses need improvement""Lacks a built-in flash""No in-camera Raw conversion"....what kind of Cons is that....just enough to make the CONs list as long as the PROs list?
The camera for sure is not perfect, but...com'on thats lime...
So long as it's not a lemon, that's fine.
jaygeephoto: As a professional photographer I fully understand that equipment is not always pleasing to look at - I used to own a Rollieflex twin lens! However for a family/vacation/survey camera this thing is absolutely hideous - especially with the optional viewfinder attachment. Does anyone remember something called the Vsioflex that attached to Leica M cameras? It made an otherwise panache´looking camera into something that resembled a Russian moon lander.
When the sloped back Porsche was introduced, somebody said "it looks ugly until you see what it can do". Without the hood and finder, this camera looks like a camera to me.
One has to ask is image quality more important than having a stylish camera. Apparently, many people don't think so.
Hugo808: Looks lovely, just what I need, big sensor, small body, perfect lens range and bound to have good IQ. Form an orderly queue behind me.
Shouldn't be a line. This isn't Nikon and Canon rarely backorders more than 2-3 weeks. This camera should be like an RX100 with a big sensor although probably not as slick as the Sony interface.
No big deal but Is it really necessary, in a DPR article to say "Sigma also makes a line of cameras"? This is getting into Pop Photo territory, no?
Richard Franiec: Accepting the Quattro shape require breaking the mental barriers of usual and expected.I've jig saw approximate shape from piece of wood and I'm surprised how quickly the initial confusion turned to acceptance and, in fact, delight with every consecutive try.Of course, there is different weight distribution in camera with lens compared with a piece of wood without control layout but I would like to caution the first impressions reviewers from jumping the gun based on first grab.Give this design time to sink in and you'll be surprised...
Well, if anyone should know about ergonomics, it's you, Richard. But even for Sigma, this seems rather weird.
pacnwhobbyist: Does that lens hood come with the camera?
These wide angle hoods don't do much and are one more item to tote around with what should be a one-piece camera. How about this--the accessory handgrip is $30. Richard couldn't make it for less. Canon needs someone from Fuji to explain that OEM grips are supposed to cost at least $100.
mufflon: lets wait for the first samples. now there are just some numbers nothing more!numbers don't make great pictures.
If they did, DxO ratings would translate into actual user results and experiences.
Jaythomasni: Wrong Product Planning. G1X is mostly perceived as another G series. results are also similar. What Canon should have done is to place this camera in a separate category of "Bridge" camera like Sony Rx10 in a small form factor. With top L-class optic and a high read out sensor of this size and a dedicated super Macro at a price point 1200-1400 .With stellar results and an all in one solutions would have made a big impact.. It almost matches the price of a entry dslr with an average lens.
They did. It was the PowerShot 1, if I recall. L lens, red ring, small sensor. Pretty good, actually.
Zeisschen: Too large for a jeans pocket >> not qualified to compare with an RX100II.
Better compare it to a Panasonic GM1 with kit lens at that size.
What really fits in a jeans pocket? I tried, very carefully putting a RX100 in a pants pocket with nothing protecting it except that built-in lens cover. It was possible but not practical.
Not sure I get this. Even when they are introduced with the camera, these finders look like something that was forgotten and by the time somebody noticed, it was too late to fit it in the camera. Whoops!
At least it's optional. That should please everyone except DPR readers.
Joseph Mama: I'm afraid that it needs more time on the treadmill, cuz it is still pretty chunky. Its hard to justify that beast of a camera over an RX100 that is WAY smaller, and delivers very similar image quality presumably.This IS really the first enthusiast compact zoom camera that has specs that outshine the RX100 though! Every other camera released has been the usual 1/1.7 drek. This has a bigger sensor AND impressively.. a nice 5x zoom for 24-120 range, vs 28-90. Thats pretty cool.
You may presume the RX100 delivers very similar image quality, however this is not the case. How do I know? I had two RX100 and the current G1X produces noticably better image quality. The RX100 is superior in every other way; just not image quality.
Charlieangel: Most of the comments here are ignoring what's new and noteworthy about this camera: the sensor size and aperture range. Presumably this will allow it to compete well, in terms of IQ, with a wide range of premium cameras including some well-regarded M4/3s and DSLRs, as well as the Sony RX100 and RX10, not to mention the other large sensor compacts with zoom lenses.
The sensor size, aperture range, and zoom lens in a relatively compact body make this a unique camera, and Canon deserves some recognition. This really sets a new standard for what it is. The 180 degree screen articulation and price point are also notable.
It you require a viewfinder, well, there are plenty of options; but most digital cameras today don't have viewfinders, and there are plenty of folk willing to trade the optical or electronic viewfinder for a more compact camera. Compare it to the Sony RX10, for example, which has twice the volume. The LCD screen works perfectly well as a viewfinder in many situations.
The combination of these things is noteworthy but the existing model has a large sensor. It's just very slow and people would rather have lower quality images in a smaller, slicker camera.
Mirfak: Perhaps the most interesting camera from Canon in a long time. Amazing lens range and speed on such a large sensor. Glad to see that they retained a movable LCD of some kind. Shot-shot time with RAW capture and AF speed will be a make or break for this camera.
Cons:Video has taken a back seat, which is why Pannys are often a better buy. No mic out, no mention of ND filter (removed from the GiX??), no mention of focus peaking, and worst of all, no 1080/24p and 1080/60p modes. Then again, video output from Canon cameras have always been pretty lousy, so the lack of these features probably don't matter anyway. Anyone buying this camera will be doing so for photography purposes mainly.
I think they're just going for the best possible single image in a small package. If people need video with less compromise than an all-in-one compact camera, Canon has some nice video cameras for that purpose.
Sannaborjeson: Just another slow compact for the price of really good mirror less camera. To me the whole concept of such camera is slightly outdated.
I thought the same thing. Until I realized how compact a decent camera can be when you don't have to carry extra lenses, caps, bag, change lenses, etc. This is part of the appeal of the Fuji although 35mm only seems a little limiting.
jservais: The Mark 2 looks to be a superb advance. At least for one who depends on one camera for general photojournalism. The lens is awesome and we have confidence in the canon optics. 24mm and f2.0. That makes for more photo options an better still photos, which is the goal. I used a Leica system for 40 years of pro photography and want a compact, quiet, reliable and quality still camera.
Sure, I could wish for the moon and criticize the location of the some control or lack of a feature. But this camera's niche is backup for pros shooting with multiple lenses or for those of us who want high quality in a single package. I do not have other cameras. My G1X is my bread and butter - and the Mk 2 will replace it perfectly.
It retains the articulated LCD screen - which is mandatory. I may be pressed against a wall to get an interior shot and can hold it above my head or at my chest or at knee level and use the LCD to compose. Thanks Canon. I just hope the battery has more juice.
If it's good at 24mm and f/2. On paper, it's wonderful.
Dimit: Nice upgrade,nothing special indeed,,with the usual Canon overpricing!Should be 280 $ less..so boring in 2014 surrounding..
And the accessory hand grip costs $30! It's an outrage.
VaLeX: I'd like to know more about:1. Sensor size: in relative terms, how does it compare with APS-C, m4/3 and Sony's 1"?2. How are the control rings on the lens working? Fly by wire? How fast and responsive are they?3. I don't think I've missed something, but the camera is not weatherproof, right?
The results from the current G1X make it pretty clear that a big sensor makes a big difference (and Canon isn't known for state of the art sensors to begin with). But when you see these numbers it's obvious how much you give up if you just have to have a small camera.
Looks good. One thing I knew for sure was that Canon wouldn't give it a logical name (G2X). Not a big deal. G1XmkII reminds me of that Stallone movie, First Blood, Part 2.
love_them_all: The viewfinder trolls will be all over this camera! LOL
You can get it without a viewfinder or get it with a viewfinder but some people will demand a third option.
ryanshoots: I think if your work is good enough to get license you can do better selling it on your own or seek out a deal with an agency directly. These opt in to the agency pools deals are never as good as if the agency wants your work because it's unique. And by the way, do we really need anymore photoshopped to hell and back landscape stock?
What we need is more guys with a D800 and Zeiss lenses shooting landscapes. Any photo agency will jump on this stuff because it's so unique.